ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Upfront laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus preoperative MRCP or ERCP in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal diagnostic and therapeutic strategy for patients with intermediate-to-high-risk of choledocholithiasis and stable or decreasing total bilirubin levels remains unclear. Although magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are used preoperatively, their diagnostic yield, complication risks, and cost-effectiveness in this subgroup remain debated.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for suspected choledocholithiasis between January 2018 and December 2023. Inclusion criteria were a total bilirubin between 30 and 70 µmol/L (1.8-4.1 mg/dL) at presentation with a stable or decreasing trend, or a dilated common bile duct on imaging. Patients were categorized by initial management strategy: MRCP-first, ERCP-first, upfront LC, or LC with intraoperative cholangiogram (LC-IOC). The primary outcome was diagnostic yield. Secondary outcomes included ERCP complications, hospital length of stay (LOS), and readmission rates. A cost analysis was also performed.
resultsOf the 245 included patients, 88 were in the MRCP-first group, 35 in the ERCP-first group, 119 underwent upfront LC, and 3 had LC-IOC. Diagnostic yield was 30.7% for MRCP and 51.4% for ERCP. ERCP-related complications occurred in 17.9% of patients, including pancreatitis (8.9%), bleeding (7.1%), and perforation (1.8%). Retained CBD stones requiring postoperative ERCP occurred in 5.9% of upfront LC patients. Median LOS was shorter in the upfront LC group (3 days) compared with both the MRCP-first and ERCP-first groups (5 days each, p < 0.001). Thirty-day and 90-day readmission rates did not differ significantly across groups. The upfront LC group incurred lower hospital costs than all other groups (p < 0.001).
conclusionsIn intermediate-to-high-risk patients with stable or decreasing bilirubin levels, upfront LC was associated with favorable outcomes, shorter hospitalization, and lower costs. Given the modest diagnostic yield of MRCP and ERCP, these findings highlight limitations of current risk stratification and suggest the need for more selective preoperative imaging in appropriately chosen patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42420492What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.